Kerala High Court
Safamakkah Property Developers Pvt Ltd vs The Sub Collector/Revenue Divisional ... on 7 August, 2025
Author: C.S.Dias
Bench: C.S.Dias
2025:KER:59102
WP(C) NO. 8176 OF 2025
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS
THURSDAY, THE 7TH DAY OF AUGUST 2025 / 16TH SRAVANA, 1947
WP(C) NO. 8176 OF 2025
PETITIONER:
SAFAMAKKAH PROPERTY DEVELOPERS PVT LTD,
AGED 55 YEARS
REGISTERED OFFICE AT 6/286 MANAKKAT VAKKATHODY
HOUSE, VATTALLOOR P.O., KARINCHAPADY, CHOVVANA,
MALAPPURAM DISTRICT REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR
MR.HARIS BABU, SON OF MUHAMMEDKUTTY,
PONNANGATHODI HOUSE, ARIPRA P.O., MALAPPURAM
DISTRICT, PIN - 679321
BY ADVS.
SRI.P.M.ZIRAJ
SHRI.IRFAN ZIRAJ
RESPONDENTS:
1 THE SUB COLLECTOR/REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER
(RDO),
PERINTHALMANNA, MALAPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 679322
2 THE LOCAL LEVEL MONITORING-
CONSTITUTED UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF KERALA
CONSERVATION OF PADDY LAND AND WET LAND ACT 2008,
PUZHAKKATTIRI, MALAPURAM DISTRICT REPRESENTED BY
ITS CONVENER, AGRICULTURAL OFFICER,
PUZHAKKATTIRI, MALAPURAM, PIN - 679321
2025:KER:59102
WP(C) NO. 8176 OF 2025
2
3 AGRICULTURAL OFFICER,
KRISHIBAVAN, PUZHAKKATTIRI, MALAPURAM DISTRICT,
PIN - 679321
4 THE VILLAGE OFFICER,
PUZHAKKATTIRI VILLAGE, MALAPURAM DISTRICT, PIN -
679321
5 THE DEPUTY COLLECTOR(DM),
CIVIL STATION, PERINTHALMANNA, MALAPURAM
DISTRICT, PIN - 679322
SMT.JESSY S.SALIM, GP
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR FINAL
HEARING ON 07.08.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED
THE FOLLOWING:
2025:KER:59102
WP(C) NO. 8176 OF 2025
3
C.S.DIAS, J.
---------------------------------------
W.P.(C) No. 8176 of 2025
-----------------------------------------
Dated this the 7th day of August, 2025
JUDGMENT
The petitioner is the owner in possession of 29
Ares and 94.7 sq.m. of land comprised in Survey No.
4/5-1 of Puzhakkattiri Village in Malappuram District,
covered under Ext.P2 land tax receipt. The property is
a converted land and is unsuitable for paddy
cultivation. Nevertheless, the respondents have
erroneously classified the property as 'paddy land' and
included it in the data bank maintained under the
Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act,
2008, and the Rules framed thereunder ('Act' and
'Rules', for brevity). To exclude the property from the
data bank, the petitioner had submitted Ext.P-3
application in Form 5, under Rule 4(4d) of the Rules.
2025:KER:59102
WP(C) NO. 8176 OF 2025
However, by Ext.P5 order, the authorised officer has
summarily rejected the application without either
conducting a personal inspection of the land or calling
for the satellite pictures as mandated under Rule 4(4f)
of the Rules. Furthermore, the order is devoid of any
independent finding regarding the nature and
character of the land as it existed on 12.08.2008 -- the
date the Act came into force. The impugned order,
therefore, is arbitrary and unsustainable in law and
liable to be quashed.
2. I have heard the learned Counsel for the
petitioner and the learned Government Pleader.
3. The petitioner's principal contention is that the
applied property is not a cultivable paddy field but is a
converted plot. Nonetheless, the property has been
incorrectly included in the data bank. Despite filing the
Form 5 application, the authorised officer has rejected
2025:KER:59102
WP(C) NO. 8176 OF 2025
the same without proper consideration or application
of mind.
4. It is now well-settled by a catena of judgments
of this Court -- including the decisions in
Muraleedharan Nair R v. Revenue Divisional
Officer [2023 (4) KHC 524], Sudheesh U v. The
Revenue Divisional Officer, Palakkad [2023 (2) KLT
386], and Joy K.K. v. The Revenue Divisional
Officer/Sub Collector, Ernakulam [2021 (1) KLT
433] -- that the authorised officer is obliged to assess
the nature, lie and character of the land and its
suitability for paddy cultivation as on 12.08.2008,
which are the decisive criteria to determine whether
the property is to be excluded from the data bank.
5. A reading of Ext.P5 order reveals that the
authorised officer has failed to comply with the
statutory requirements. There is no indication in the
2025:KER:59102
WP(C) NO. 8176 OF 2025
order that the authorised officer has personally
inspected the property or called for the satellite
pictures as mandated under Rule 4(4f) of the Rules.
Instead, the authorised officer has merely acted upon
the report of the Agricultural Officer without rendering
any independent finding regarding the nature and
character of the land as on the relevant date. There is
also no finding whether the exclusion of the property
would prejudicially affect the surrounding paddy fields.
In light of the above findings, I hold that the impugned
order was passed in contravention of the statutory
mandate and the law laid down by this Court. Thus, the
impugned order is vitiated due to errors of law and
non-application of mind, and is liable to be quashed.
Consequently, the authorised officer is to be directed to
reconsider the Form 5 application as per the procedure
prescribed under the law.
2025:KER:59102
WP(C) NO. 8176 OF 2025
In the circumstances mentioned above, I allow the
writ petition in the following manner:
(i) Ext.P5 order is quashed.
(ii) The 1st respondent/authorised officer is directed
to reconsider the Form 5, in accordance with the
law, by either conducting a personal inspection of
the property or calling for the satellite pictures as
provided under Rule 4(4f) of the Rules, at the cost
of the petitioner.
(iii) If satellite pictures are called for, the application
shall be disposed of within three months from the
date of receipt of such pictures. On the other
hand, if the authorised officer opts to inspect the
property personally, the application shall be
disposed of within two months from the date of
production of a copy of this judgment by the
petitioner.
The writ petition is thus ordered accordingly.
Sd/-
C.S.DIAS, JUDGE
dkr
2025:KER:59102
WP(C) NO. 8176 OF 2025
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 8176/2025
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGE OF DATA
BANK IN CONNECTION WITH THE PROPERTY OF
PETITIONER
EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT IN
CONNECTION WITH THE PROPERTY OF
PETITIONER DATED 17.4.2024 ISSUED BY
THE VILLAGE OFFICER, PUZHAKATTIRI
VILLAGE
EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED
9.7.2024 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER IN
FORM 5 BEFORE THE FIRST RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT DATED 9.7.2024
ISSUED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT
REGARDING RECEIPT OF APPLICATION FEE
EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 22.01.2025
ISSUED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT
